Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

BARTELLI v. JONES

November 16, 2005.

KEITH BARTELLI, Plaintiff,
v.
DONALD JONES, Defendant.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: EDWIN KOSIK, Senior District Judge

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

AND NOW, THIS 16th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2005, IT APPEARING TO THE COURT THAT:

[1] On April 26, 2004, plaintiff filed the above-captioned action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983;

  [2] the matter was assigned to United States Magistrate Judge Thomas M. Blewitt;

  [3] on October 29, 2004, this court adopted in part a Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge and dismissed claims four and five of plaintiff's complaint, denied plaintiff's request to file an amended complaint, and remanded the matter to the magistrate judge for further proceedings on plaintiff's first three claims;

  [4] in his remaining claims, the plaintiff asserts that: (1) defendant Jones conspired to violate plaintiff's due process and equal protection rights beginning in April of 2000; (2) the defendant conspired with a guard at SCI Dallas on October 29, 2001, to retaliate against Bartelli after he reported the "illegal, racist and unprofessional acts of staff at SCI Dallas;" and, (3) the defendant violated plaintiff's equal protection rights on December 12, 2001, when the defendant told Bartelli that he would never believe an inmate over a staff member;*fn1

  [5] the defendant filed a motion for summary judgment and for judgment on the pleadings on May 23, 2005; (Doc. 46).

  [6] both parties briefed the motion for summary judgment;

  [7] Magistrate Judge Blewitt issued a Report and Recommendation on September 16, 2005, suggesting that we grant the defendant's motion and dismiss all three of the plaintiff's claims;

  [8] neither the plaintiff, nor the defendant filed objections to the Report and Recommendation.*fn2

  IT FURTHER APPEARING THAT:

  [9] If no objections are filed to a Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, the Court need not conduct a de novo review of the plaintiff's claims. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150-53, 106 S.Ct. 466 (1985). Nonetheless, the usual practice of the district court is to give "reasoned consideration" to a magistrate judge's report prior to adopting it. Henderson v. Carlson, 812 F.2d 874, 878 (3rd Cir. 1987);

  [10] having examined the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, we agree with his recommendation to grant the defendant's motion for summary judgment and motion for judgment on the pleadings;

  [11] we concur with the Magistrate Judge's analysis of the issues raised in the defendants's motion and find the Magistrate Judge's ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.